Louis, if you want to set yourself up as a villain, you may do so. But I was not. I try to aim my discussion at the list as a whole.
It is a total misrepresentation to say that I said that "socialism from below" [was] "the road to salvation and the
opposite side taking you straight to hell." That's a "black-white presentation of the two sides," as you say, but I didn't do it.
The fact is that the Russian Revolution failed, leading to the rise of a powerful new stratum, a self-selecting elite (the CPSU). There were lots of things that happened that were out of socialists' control (imperialist invasion, the division between the peasantry and the workers, the poverty of the country, the civil war, etc.) that encouraged that result. However, we can learn from this experience to fight and/or delay the development of the new elite; history isn't totally out of the left's control. One thing is to NOT focus on "building the party" (as the Maoists and Trotskyists do, for example) but instead use any organization as means to build up the workers' power and the power of other dominated group. The latter kinds of power are the main bulwarks not only against the restoration of capitalism but against the creation of a new stratum running the country "in the workers' name" (and taking advantage of their powers).
The basic principle is that power corrupts, i.e., that if we rely on wise leaders to make decisions for working people, we're bound to be disappointed. So the wise leaders must be held responsible in a democratic way.
------------------------
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Louis Proyect [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 4:08 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEN-L:32173] Re: soc. from below
>
>
> Jim Devine:
> >BTW, I'm not against talking about tactics or strategy. I just think that
> >a total rejection of more fundamental issues is a mistake, so that a
> >restriction of discussion to only tactics, strategy, propaganda, and the
> >like is a major mistake.
>
> The problem is that you are trying to set me up as a villain
> when you frame the discussion as one over whether one is for or against democratic
> socialism or "socialism from below". How stupid do you think I am? I admit
> I am pretty stupid when it comes to many things, but on something like this
> I am quite shrewd. This is essentially a black-white presentation of the
> two sides, with "socialism from below" being the road to salvation and the
> opposite side taking you straight to hell. It reminds me of high school
> debate club when the teacher would arbitrarily assign topics
> to students. "Louis, you will make the case for slavery. Sally, you will defend
> Lincoln's point of view."
>
> We are not in high school now.
>
>
>
> Louis Proyect, Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
>
>
